On November 26, 2004, Plaintiff brought this action pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division. While Plaintiff was a pretrial detainee in a minimum-security facility, Maricopa County jail officials ordered a search of his entire housing ...
read more >

On November 26, 2004, Plaintiff brought this action pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division. While Plaintiff was a pretrial detainee in a minimum-security facility, Maricopa County jail officials ordered a search of his entire housing unit. During the search, Plaintiff claims that a partial strip search and pat down of his groin area was conducted by a female training cadet despite the availability of male detention officers nearby. Plaintiff alleged that the search violated his right under the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable searches, and his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to equal protection of the laws and substantive due process protection to be free from punishment. Plaintiff named the cadet, the cadet's supervisor, and Maricopa County Sheriff's Department as Defendants.

Following the presentation of evidence, both parties moved for judgment as a matter of law. The court (Judge Neil V. Wake) granted judgment as a matter of law in favor of the cadet's supervisor and the Maricopa County. The court also ruled as a matter of law that the search was constitutionally valid. With the female cadet as the only remaining Defendant, the court narrowed the issues to be presented to the jury. On August 16, 2007, the jury found for Defendant on all counts. The District Court entered judgment in favor of all Defendants.

Plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit. On May 18, 2009, in a published opinion by Judge Sandra S. Ikuta, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's judgment. The Court of Appeals subsequently granted rehearing en banc. On January 05, 2011, in a published opinion by Judge Johnnie B. Rawlinson, the Court of Appeals held that the cross-gender strip search performed on Plaintiff was unreasonable as a matter of law and violated Plaintiff's rights under the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable searches. Accordingly, the District Court's entry of judgment as a matter of law in favor of the cadet's supervisor and Maricopa County was reversed, and the case was remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

A former pretrial detainee in the minimum-security jail in Maricopa County contends that a partial strip search and pat down of his groin area conducted by a female training cadet violated his constitutional rights.